• Sign in to Neowin Faster!

    Create an account on Neowin to contribute and support the site.

Sign in to follow this  

Vista sucks for now!

Recommended Posts

Kainz    0

It's obviously not superfetch as that runs in low priority i/o mode and should not cause any issues there.

On my rig, Vista x32 annihilates XP from a great height speed wise, and my rig isn't anything special. I've not read the entire thread but there has to be something wrong with your rig if you're getting slow ui performance and HD access issues. Vista doesn't even remotely require SP1.

I do admit that the OS can be a major PITA when it wants to be, hell I've had my fair share of app compat problems, but aside from that it's a massive leap over XP. About two months ago I went back to XP and lasted just a single day, I missed way too many vista features and ended up reinstalling, and haven't looked back since.

IE 7 issues = I use FF so can't really comment.

HD Issues = Not entirely sure. It's not superfetch, could it be indexing? Depends on how many drives you've selected for indexing in the first place. Other then that, it could be a hardware issue.

GUI Speed = It's way quicker then XP...once you disable the fading of menus, and window max/min anims.

Boot time = I rarely reboot, but it seems to be around the same as XP Pro for me.

HD Video = In my blog below, I've got an article about using the 360 HD-DVD drive in vista - not a single issue there at all via PowerDVD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
freak_power    0
Maybe 3,4ghz (clocked to 3,7ghz) with 2gig ram and geforce 7800gt isn't enough for a smooth vista xperience? hehe.

I think that vista has to many security things and checkpoints of useless things. Like i had the UAC turned on, but it gave me a ultra slow GUI experience. As soon as i turned it off the GUI was much more smooth. I hope they optimize it when SP1 is out. I'll reinstall it then.

I say 2GB of RAM is not enough for Vista. Also, i suggest you have RAID 0 HDD or at least some bad ass fast HDD like WD Raptor, otherwise it's gonna suck too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
x-byte    94

2GB in Vista is plenty. Almost no HDD access on my PC compared to XP. 1GB is about the lowest you should go though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Budious    0
I say 2GB of RAM is not enough for Vista. Also, i suggest you have RAID 0 HDD or at least some bad ass fast HDD like WD Raptor, otherwise it's gonna suck too.

I was watching task manager the other day while running Medieval II: Total War and the combined usage was at exactly 1GB and I have 2GB installed in my laptop. I think 2GB is just fine so long as you are not heavily multi-tasking memory intensive applications.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SnowRanger13    27

Most things are faster under Vista for me, the main thing that I'm getting really poor performance on is some games... I might go back to XP for a while till they fix it, I mean at 1280x1024 in XP these games were running smooth now in Vista @ 1024x768 there all choppy :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chicane-UK    675
I say 2GB of RAM is not enough for Vista. Also, i suggest you have RAID 0 HDD or at least some bad ass fast HDD like WD Raptor, otherwise it's gonna suck too.

Don't you think its INSANE that you need that sort of horsepower for the operating system?!

Totally underwhelmed by my experience with Vista to be honest. Running it on Core2Duo E6600, 3GB RAM, GeForce 7600GS and yeah it seems smooth enough but I just don't see what the improvement is over XP to be honest. I like the glass effect of course.. nice to have Windows looking pretty but if thats all there is to it from a day to day / productivity point of view, might as well be back in XP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ViperAFK    797

It runs fine on my modest hardware 3 ghz 478 p4 3.0E, 1 GB Ram, 256MB 7600GS, 160 GB HDD.

- Navigation in IE7. Takes MUCH longer time to display pages and if you press the BACK button, you have to wait. In XP everything is smooth again - pretty much the same as xp for me.

- HDD is accessing ALL the time in vista - Only for the first day or two for me.

- System speed is poor in vista. GUI is SOOOO much faster in XP - I find Aero much more responsive than XP, especially under load

- Boot time. Do i have to comment this one? - Boot time in Vista is faster than my tweaked XP

- Video (HD 720/1080p codecs) perform BAD in vista. In XP i can run 1080p fine when vista lagg - Haven't tried any HD videos Yet, may be crappy drivers.

Edited by ViperAFK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+primortal    18,289
Maybe 3,4ghz (clocked to 3,7ghz) with 2gig ram and geforce 7800gt isn't enough for a smooth vista xperience? hehe.

I think that vista has to many security things and checkpoints of useless things. Like i had the UAC turned on, but it gave me a ultra slow GUI experience. As soon as i turned it off the GUI was much more smooth. I hope they optimize it when SP1 is out. I'll reinstall it then.

could it be the overclocking? Also could be the video drivers I think nvidia still has them in beta....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DKAngel    329

hell vista runs great on my 3800+x2 o/c @ 2.22ghz with 2gig ram, i couldnt go back to xp at all

and even so my lappy with a celeron M 1.5ghz with 768megs ram on vista home preimum runs vista pretty damn good, on par with xp in fact, with the only issue being the sleep/hibernation not waking up issue that ms is still trying to fix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Googintosh    6
- HDD is accessing ALL the time in vista

Ditto. I kid not, my HDD was thrashing literally for two days straight on a brand new HDD. I went to bed it was thrashing, I'd wake up, it was still thrashing. It was causing sluggish performance for any application that required HDD access. The moment I disabled SuperFetch the thrashing stopped.

I understand how SuperFetch is supposed to operate in a low priority i/o mode, but there must be a bug somewhere (either with Vista or a driver) that subsequently causes SuperFetch to perform abnormally on some configurations.

- Boot time

My boot-up speed with Vista is slow too, but I really don't care about that since I reboot the system so infrequently.

- Video (HD 720/1080p codecs) perform BAD in vista. In XP i can run 1080p fine when vista lagg

I have the same problem too. The lag is horrible with WMP, not as bad with MPC (lags about every 4 seconds) with HD video. Same video runs fine in XP, so I'm not sure what that's all about.

I have a p4 3,4ghz (3,7ghz clocked) with 2 gig ram.

My PC specs are a bit better than yours though: Athlon 64 X2 3800+ / 2 GB RAM / Radeon x1650 Pro. My WEI rating is 4.0, the lowest scores being the RAM at 4.0 and processor at 4.8, everything else is 5.3 and above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mayhem    8

2gb ram beeing 4.0 is pretty low, i have 2GB also and have the score of 5.9 on it

that constant HDD accessing all the time is weird, try to disable Windows Search and Offline Files and enable SuperFetch to see if still appends

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
x-byte    94
Ditto. I kid not, my HDD was thrashing literally for two days straight on a brand new HDD. I went to bed it was thrashing, I'd wake up, it was still thrashing. It was causing sluggish performance for any application that required HDD access. The moment I disabled SuperFetch the thrashing stopped.

I understand how SuperFetch is supposed to operate in a low priority i/o mode, but there must be a bug somewhere (either with Vista or a driver) that subsequently causes SuperFetch to perform abnormally on some configurations.

Don't you read the thread before posting? It's because of the indexing service. After a while it will stop. If you dont like it, disable it by disable the Windows Search service. Also check which files you have selected to be indexed.

After this is disabled/finished Vista will rarely access the HDD for frequently used applications.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Googintosh    6

Don't you read the thread before posting? It's because of the indexing service. After a while it will stop. If you dont like it, disable it by disable the Windows Search service. Also check which files you have selected to be indexed.

After this is disabled/finished Vista will rarely access the HDD for frequently used applications.

:rolleyes:

Condescending replies like that annoy me. It could be a variety of things causing it. For all you know it could be an incompatibility with third-party software. But it's definitely not the indexing service. That was the first service I disabled when I was trying to troubleshoot. When Vista is in fact indexing files I can barely notice, it doesn't degrade performance as opposed to when I have SuperFetch enabled.

Anyway, I don't want to hijack this guys thread.

2gb ram beeing 4.0 is pretty low, i have 2GB also and have the score of 5.9 on it

I think it is because I have value RAM, it is not the fastest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PT 13    9

Vista runs faster on my computer than XP (and every software I tried on it too -- Including games)

Specs:

Intel Core 2 Duo @ 2.0Ghz

2GB DDRII 667MHZ

geForce 7700

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MrCobra    0
Don't you think its INSANE that you need that sort of horsepower for the operating system?!

Totally underwhelmed by my experience with Vista to be honest. Running it on Core2Duo E6600, 3GB RAM, GeForce 7600GS and yeah it seems smooth enough but I just don't see what the improvement is over XP to be honest. I like the glass effect of course.. nice to have Windows looking pretty but if thats all there is to it from a day to day / productivity point of view, might as well be back in XP.

ABSOLUTELY.

I used Vista from RTM to about mid February or so (give or a take a couple of days). There are some nice features in it but as a whole I think the OS is lacking sorely in fit and finish.

  • The UI is not consistant.
  • Horrible performance.
  • Out of memory errors while copying 50 megs worth of files (4gigs of ram)
  • Can't access the full power of my 8800
  • H/W accelerated sound is no more (I got sound lag)
  • Games take a bad performance hit
  • HDD thrashing constantly (audio/video/program lag because of it)
  • U.A.C
  • BOOT/SHUTDOWN times were slow
  • ect.
  • ect.
  • ect.

I could go on and on. Overall I give it a big (N). Somehow I don't think SP1 will do this OS any good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
x-scratch    134

vista runs smooth on my machine i refuse to go back to xp so you need more ram big deal rams cheap now days

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5Horizons    1

I agree, it definitely sucks right now. I ended up switching back to XP. There were a few things that I missed, but having my computer run at top speed without bugs and constant HD grinding is worth it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nero78    0

Many people with different opinions with vista.

Some says it's booting faster. I dont understand that? I just installed XP now and it is booting very fast. Compared to a clean Vista installation it's almost twice as fast. Is this because of my HDD/Mainboard drivers? I have a abit AW8 mobo and a Samsung Spinpont 250GB HDD (about a year and a half old). Is it poor drivers in my system that does this?

I have read A LOT of posts here about people complaining about constant HDD accessing. Just like me. And then there is a lot og people who says they're HDD is quiet? How come? I have had vista installed for about 30 days at the most and the HDD thrasing never quite stops. It cools down a bit, but compared to XP it's accessing almost all the time. Can't be indexing and superfetching all the time?? I do have Norton 360 installed (on XP and Vista), but i have turned off all automatic scans.

There are more things that people disagree with and it's making me wonder why. From great speeds to poor performance on almost the same hardware? Isn't that a bit strange??

Is it all about the drivers still? 6 months after the release and almost a year from the business release? I just feel something is wrong here. Is it my hardware that is so special or do i just have to wait for SP1 or new drivers? Can't remeber if XP was that different in performance when it was out or am i wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
x-byte    94
:rolleyes:

Condescending replies like that annoy me. It could be a variety of things causing it. For all you know it could be an incompatibility with third-party software. But it's definitely not the indexing service. That was the first service I disabled when I was trying to troubleshoot. When Vista is in fact indexing files I can barely notice, it doesn't degrade performance as opposed to when I have SuperFetch enabled.

Anyway, I don't want to hijack this guys thread.

I think it is because I have value RAM, it is not the fastest.

If there's anyting you have done, why don't you just give us the information. Mostly this is because of the indexing service. I wasn't trying to be condescending at all, just tired of people not reading the posts and blame Vista for anything wrong when it has nothing to do with Vista.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SpyCatcher    224

I just uninstalled vista yesterday. Had it installed from when it was launched. Looks great, but performs awful! I installed XP again this morning and everytning just is FAST again! I just love my computer now! :) I have a p4 3,4ghz (3,7ghz clocked) with 2 gig ram.

Here is a list of things that perform bad i vista:

- Navigation in IE7. Takes MUCH longer time to display pages and if you press the BACK button, you have to wait. In XP everything is smooth again/quote]

This sounds more like Ritalin issue than a IE 7 issue.

OP: Not to rude go to this site and download it will make you look like a genius www.iespell.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BilliShere    4

vista-> i like it very much after customizing it a bit to my taste. i disabled superfetch and readyboost. In my opinion these two features are a waste memory . I want memory available for my apps. i understand that there is practically no performance loss when launching memory intensive applications like say photoshop. because superfetch is very optimized yasa yada and takes out stuff from the memory really quick making it available for the app. but i hate the sound of harddisks churning and it ****es me off. so i disabled it. and to my surprise vista is actually a lot faster. I really hate the higher system specifications even though my pc is pretty good enuff. i gotta core 2 duo 6300, 2 gigs of ram, 320gb sata 7200rpm hd, and intel graphics accelerator 950 (which sucks but handles aero quite decently.) When I disable the aero gui--the interface speeds up very very fast. To get rid of the copy paste length of time problem where vista is stuck at "calculating time remaining" and takes forever to finish transfering files i use teracopy. an excellent app that speeds up file moving in vista and xp. so it is a good i dea you use this program. it will speed up your file transferring big time due to its use of advanced algorythms and all that. removing useless junk like sidebar and having very few startup applications also helps. i am disgusted by vista's startup time. what is even worse is that i feel microsoft cheated and told us a bunch of lies. as usual. where the hell are my extras. it really shouldnt take that long to roll em out. and whats even worse is that they promised us of really fast boot up times " oh yah it will be faster xp!" WTH? where are those boottimes? vista is twice as slow than xp when it comes to boot times. there is no work around for that except putting ur pc to sleep or not shutting it down at all..which is what im doing now lmao!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Phantom Limb    0

I don't know how your systems are set up and all (those that are having problems), but I have 1 GB Ram, 2 Intel P4s and an nVidia 6600, Vista runs just as fast as XP does on my system, with glass and everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BilliShere    4
I don't know how your systems are set up and all (those that are having problems), but I have 1 GB Ram, 2 Intel P4s and an nVidia 6600, Vista runs just as fast as XP does on my system, with glass and everything.

how are ur boot times? just as fast as xp? i find overall, excluding the boot time, vista works just a little bit slower than xp...and thats after plenty of tweaking and driver updates and what not!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
guruparan    0
I have seen many complaints about all the HDD access. It's not superfetch or index. I have (eehh had) a 30 days old installation and the HDD just accessed all the time. Have disabled all antivirus, superfectch and index. Still a lot of HDD access. In XP it's silent....and MCSE. Not all people do have to explain all in boring technical details.

You work at Microsoft?....kidding us right?...

For me..Vista is nice & stable with my system config.

Dual core 2.6ghz, intel 945 motherboard, nvidia 7300 graphics card (256mb), 80gb + 120 gb hdd, dvd rom, 2 GB ram.

I am running Halo, halo2 for vista, age of empires, fsx, halflife 2, need for speed most wanted. Almost all the games are OK for me...soon i expect more performance than xP in gaming sector (it all stands in SP1 & in nvidia).

But for now...Vista is better than XP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
delloptiplex    0

i donno about you guys but i don't have this hard drive thrashing problem nor will i ever go back to xp (vista is better, it actually plays america's army on my computer now)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.